Changes in the media landscape have become an immediate threat to the -financial- survival of The Automatic Earth. It's time to Support Us! Make a one-time and/or recurring Donation. Our Paypal widget is in the top left corner of this site (bottom of page on mobile). The address for checks and money orders is on our Store and Donations page.

Our politicians and media are not going to allow us to see Russia, and any incidents the country can be linked to, in any other way than black and white, in which we are the good party and they are the black, evil and guilty ones. So we’ll have to do that ourselves.

More than enough has been said about why NATO should have been dismantled when the reason for its existence, the Soviet Union, was dissolved, but nobody listened and NATO has kept expanding eastward and demanding more money, more members, more weapons.

NATO demands an enemy, and their chosen enemy is Russia. This has nothing to do with anything Russia has done or is doing at the moment. We can only hope that people are willing to accept that simple fact. And not passively go along with the flow of badmouthing and smear that decides what our picture of the country is.

Russia ‘invaded’ Crimea? Russia ‘downed’ MH17? Russia sent two hapless and inept blokes to kill the Skripals? Russia launched an unprovoked attack on three Ukrainian vessels in the Sea of Azov? Russia colluded with the Trump campaign against Hillary Clinton? And collaborated with Julian Assange to make that happen?

What all these allegations have in common is that there is no evidence any of them are true. Oh, and that nobody’s really trying to prove them anymore. Because you’ve already accepted them as gospel.

90% or so of Crimeans voted to be part of Russia, after the west had tried their hand at regime change in Kiev, with John McCain and Victoria Nuland opening the gates for various neo-nazi groups to enter government.

The MH17 investigation is led by the Netherlands, the main victim. As I told Jim Kunstler in our recent podcast, you try and find a detective story where the main victim leads the investigation. Aided by Ukraine, one of the suspects, but not Russia, the designated suspect from the get-go. We’re over 4.5 years later and there is no proof -not that that keeps anyone from assigning blame.

The Skripals were allegedly attacked with the most deadly nerve gas ever, and allegedly survived. They simply haven’t been heard from anymore. There are images of two alleged Russian spies who went out of their way to be filmed and photographed in Salisbury, but their ineptitude doesn’t rhyme with Russian secret service in any way, shape or form. The west tries to make it sound like Comedy Capers, and that just gives the west away.

As for the ‘attacks’ the other day, the Guardian of all outlets explains: “Since the completion of the bridge over the Kerch strait, Moscow has demanded that Ukrainian ships not only give notice of their intention to transit the strait but request permission, a change that Kiev has rejected. According to western diplomats, the dispatch of the three ships was intended to assert freedom of navigation..”

Sure, you can claim that Russia has no right to ask Ukraine to ask for permission to the Sea of Azov, but then Kiev should have protested that demand, not send three armed vessels to ignore the demand and sail through anyway. That is called provocation.

And Ukraine provoking Russia is a bad idea. Unless you’re NATO, and you want Ukraine as a member. And unless you’re the chocolate billionaire who took over the government and now has an approval rating in the single digits with elections coming up in March. Question: how much chocolate do Ukrainians eat?

For Ukraine to enter NATO would be the most flagrant violation against the deal the west made with Gorbachev just prior to the dissolution of the Soviet union to date. And there have been plenty such violations in the past almost 30 years; little wonder that Moscow draws a line.

It’s just that nobody in the west is aware there is such a line. The media have helped politicians, NATO and arms manufacturers in painting a picture of Russia as the evil bogeymen in the east, and there is no counterweight to that picture anywhere in what people read and watch. It doesn’t matter whether the ‘news’ is accurate, because journalists don’t do their jobs to go out and check the facts.

As for the Muller’s unending investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, we know for a fact that there’s no evidence of any such thing, since Mueller would have been forced to go public with it because it’s such a serious issue; you can’t let treason lie for months or years. And sure, Mueller today fingered Manafort for lying, but that has nothing to do with collusion.

As for Mueller’s Julian Assange allegations, he should be ashamed of himself for accusing someone he knows is barred from defending himself. Mueller can say anything he likes about Assange, and does, and it has no value, Julian has been silenced to an extent that shames us all, but Mueller first.

The problem with Robert Mueller when he uses such tactics is that he loses his credibility, or rather, what he had left after solemnly testifying that Iraq possessed WMD when he was FBI head. The man is incessantly portrayed as America’s straightest arrow, but that just makes you lament the state the country is in. The odds that Trump is the straightest arrow are much higher, and even the Donald himself wouldn’t buy into that one.

As we’re worried about fake news and Facebook and election meddling and what have you, we need to be clear on what that really is. Which is, the worst and most fake news you see every single day comes from those sources that you trust most. This is not just deliberate, it’s highly profitable too. As long as you are gullible enough to keep buying into it. So far, you are.

Whenever you read anything at all about Trump, Russia/Putin and Assange in the major news outlets, chances that it is not objective or properly due diligence researched are far higher than that it is. You have to start out with the idea that what you’re about to read or watch is not true, for the simple reason that the vast majority of it is not; it only exists to serve an agenda and a narrative.

And because reporting what is not accurate makes ‘news sources’ much more money than reporting the truth. In the meantime, though, NATO, US/UK/EU intelligence and the military-industrial complex may be happy, but you should not be. Because you’ve landed somewhere in the middle between Orwell, Huxley and the Matrix. And that’s not going to end up doing you any good. Let alone your kids.

Shake it off, guys. You’re sinking. Information dissemination has become like walking into quicksand. Walking into a pre-processed narrative that deprives you of your ability to think. Not something we should wish upon anyone. But take this from me: you’re already in it, and you need to get out. It’s no longer about trying not to get in, those days are long gone. You’re already there.

The moneyed interests are pretty much running the entire show now, and even though they have implemented a policy of full spectrum propaganda dominance and surveillance, annoying citizens are still waking up here and there and creating opposition. What to do? Expect the screws of control to be tightened even further, since that is all they know. This, as it did in the later stages of the USSR, will lead to open warfare and revolt between the oppressors and the oppressed.

We just can’t seem to realize the change that is required… As I posted elsewhere, the figures pointed out by Amy Goodman in her response to the recent government report on Climate Change are ludicrous. A cost of several hundred billion by the end of the century with a 10% reduction in the “economy.” Give me a break. Climate change will cost far more than the wealth of two Seattle men and the economy needs to shrink by at least 90%…

On a related note, I recommend the book Democracy Inc by Sheldon Wolin. Recommended by Chris Hedges during his Jimmy Dore appearance. Speaking of the matrix… a search of Worldcat.org revealed that none of the major universities in the Pacific Northwest have a copy of the book. It’s not as if the author was not well respected and that the book was published by an unknown publisher. The book was published by Princeton University Press. The problem with the book from an establishment perspective is that it is too close to the truth.

“Hello AC and Welcome!
Information control is “old-school”. What I am referring to is a completely new paradigm of control in a post-fiat world. Not that FIAT will cease to exist, but that the essential functions served by FIAT will be supplanted by a NEXT GENERATION MECHANISM.
Clearer now?
Gold is THE cosmic currency…perhaps the ultimate source of knowledge. HOW that knowledge is unlocked is an entirely other question!
Laughing out Loud!You do ask a relevant question which all serious humans should address; namely “who will get food and who will starve”. Can you follow that thought thread?
Laughing out Loud!”
~Rothschild

“There will be NO jubilee…count on it!”
~House of Rothschild

“Remember, the equity and bond markets exist only to remove fiat from circulation!”
~House of Rothschild

It operates as the Money Power Monopolist Mega-Corporate Global Fascist Empire.

The HUMANS that have MONOPOLY CONTROL over MONEY CREATION have FINANCED this world into existence.

One even went public bragging about it and mocking ordinary people as complete morons for not “getting it.”

Call it a “pre-complete rout victory lap.”

“I Am Rofschild / Axe Me a Question
yes, I am of that evil banking clan, but a black sheep in wolf’s clothes,even if the stupid amoungst you want the truth,
you are too uneducated to know what to even ask.
what say you, brain trust and learned of glp?

The Rothschilds and their cohorts systematically siphon off the interest SO THAT IT IS NEVER AVAILABLE TO PAY BACK THE DEBT ASSOCIATED WITH IT. Since money is created in a balance sheet fashion (debt owed on money creation = money in circulation). this generates the fraudulent inextinguishable debts. I have a very hard time believing that this simple concept is way above Ilargi’s head.

Anyway, here’s what a Rothschild has to say about it:

“You have never owned anything, because you have never paid for your “purchases”. Using the private credit notes does not extinguish a debt.”
~Rothschild

What does he mean by not extinguishing the debt? He means the debt is associated with the money itself! Money is generated out of the issuance of debt itself!

What does he mean by not owning anything? He means the $30 trillion in debt will eventually be assigned to property tax payers, most probably as a $200K+/- assessment down the road – don’t pay and lose your property to the Money Power Monopolists corporate fronts. He explains this later on in the thread.

So, the INTEREST, not created as the PRINCIPAL is created, is taxed directly and indirectly and makes its way through various trusts, holding companies and principalities. Many eyes watch this progression through the various steps until it ultimately makes its way into worthy hands!
Simple enough?
~Rothschild

Notice how he distinguished that interest is NOT created, or treated the same, as principle. This is actually an important distinction that I’ve NEVER heard anyone else discuss. Ever. And I get around. Principle is created TO BE PAID BACK AND EXTINGUISHED BY BANKS. Interest is created based on counter party interest liability generation.

Too bad so very few people have the intellectual acumen to comprehend this applied 5th grade mathematics and balance sheet problem… or the courage to communicate what they actually know.

The point is that buying property only sets you up to have the $30 trillion in debt offloaded onto you with your property as collateral.

Why? Because nobody with an audience will proclaim the truth, that’s why. That and the Muppetry is vexxed with a selfish need to avoid VBN – Very Bad News.

We will pay for our selfish cowardice… most likely with our lives.

Oh, and there will be no Automatic Earth criticism of the following racism by Rothschild, either (watch!)…

You have never owned anything, because you have never paid for your “purchases”. Using the private credit notes does not extinguish a debt.

“Easy come, easy go.
Ever wonder why the life lived in the US is so “easy” compared to the rest of the planet?
Oh yes, I nearly forgot…you are God’s “chosen” people…not like those nasty black children in Africa who deserve what they have.
Heathens!
Laughing out loud!”
~Rothschild

You know, the black children he starves to death by the millions, but receives no criticism for “Operation Murder Nasty Black Children by the Tens of Millions.”

Nope, no criticism will be coming, at least if the history is any guide.

Can’t criticize the REAL POWER, the Wizard of Oz, if you will.

Just attack the “curtain.” You can touch anything else, but don’t touch the Money Power…

Krugman to Lietaer: “Never touch the money system!”

“There will be NO jubilee…count on it!”
~House of Rothschild

“Remember, the equity and bond markets exist only to remove fiat from circulation!”
~House of Rothschild

Anyone who’s read even only my articles on Assange this year alone will instantly recognize that the Guardian article is simply just another one of Luke Harding’s hollow hit pieces (there’ve been many). I should at least have accomplished that. No further evidence needed. But yes, if that still wasn’t enough, there are records, video and/or otherwise, of any visits to Assange at the embassy. But none exist of Manafort visiting.

The Guardian apparently doesn’t give a hoot about its own credibility anymore. That is worrisome, it’s a big step. The narrative has taken preference over everything else.

Lee Wheelbarger sums it up: even if the IPCC’s worst case scenarios are seen, that’s only a 1.5 watts per square meter increase. Zharkova’s analysis shows a 8 watts per square meter decrease in TSI to the planet.

The CIA and the national security state reacted to the Vault 7 release by targeting Assange for arrest and prosecution.

When and whether that will happen remains unclear. What is not in doubt, however, is that the Ecuadorian and British governments, working on behalf of the Trump administration, are trying to make it as difficult as possible for Julian Assange to avoid extradition by staying in the Ecuadorean embassy.

I was able to join a yearly meditation retreat with my Sangha and teacher, Anam Thubten https://www.dharmata.org/teachers/ again this past weekend.
This one was silent, and in the same place that we have had prior silent retreats, a Hindu temple Radha Madhav Dham https://radhamadhavdham.org/ . This temple was made around 1990, and looks like it was built on a small national guard facility, by a guru later convicted of 20 cases of child molestation, and still on the run. They changed to the current name after that.
It’s on a nice 200 acres with good hiking trails for walking meditation, a hill, a creek and lots of deer.
I did about 3 hours of walking meditation per day for three days, and an hour the fourth day. I did personal walking meditation for one or two of the sitting meditation sessions per day. All my sitting stuff and knees and back were uncomfortable a lot, starting early and staying late.
I spent a lot of time around groups of does, at least two, and often three groups per hour walk. A large, strong buck crossed the trail about 20 feet in front of me, mostly interested in a doe in the bushes on the other side.
I whistle to deer to be nice. I start whistling a tune when I notice them, and keep whistling until I am well past them. I’m saying that I mean them no harm. The deer show a lot of curiosity about me. Sometimes they start and run, or a couple out of a group of twelve might move to the back of the group. Sometimes small groups of three to four will move back twenty or thirty feet behind some bushes and watch me quietly. They like to have their bodies facing away, and heads craned to look at me, probably to flee quickly if needed.
Sometimes deer emotionally connect with me. I can feel it. You might have felt it, or felt something like it from other non-human beings. Lots of people feel love from pets, or irritation from pet cats. I feel two things from deer. Most often I feel sort of a tingly excitement, with little sparklies dusted all over the top of it. Often I feel that when a deer seems to notice me, looking up to make eye contact. It doesn’t last long.
Sunday afternoon I got totally immersed in a big warm, funky wave of deer love, which I’ve felt a few times before, but this wave was really engulfing. There was a group of about a dozen does of various ages about 150 yards ahead of me when I started whistling, and a large doe was watching me as long as I was looking at them. I started whistling, maybe “This Land Is Your Land” or the Dr Who theme, or my usual theme song from “Bridge On The River Kwai” (“Winners, fill up with Malt-O-Meal…”). This wave was really a total immersion experience, a flood of full, funky, earthy, warm deer love with all the exciting little sparklies dusted on and through it, too, and it lasted a good ten or twelve seconds. It felt like a welcome-home love.
A female deer reached out over 100 yards to completely engulf me with emotional and visceral love groove experience. That’s really a remarkable feat, and I’m remarking on it. I had a chance to reflect and meditate on it, because I was at a silent meditation retreat for four days. This doe may well have recognized me, the whistling human, from my previous two retreats there. I’m about the same. I open up my personal space bubble a lot at meditation retreats, sometimes pretty big. I can’t measure it, but it feels like it gets big out in the open spaces, and completely gets around in the meditation room.
I’m pretty sure I can’t do what that deer did. In February 1991, when my friend, Guy took me to hear the Dalai Lama, under a tent top in Santa Fe, and he looked in my eyes and smiled as he walked in, I felt an explosion of light and energy from within myself. WOW! I had no reality framework in which to integrate that experience. I was flabbergasted. I have never experienced it before or since, but it was clearly from His Holiness looking into my eyes and smiling from about 15 feet away. I tried really hard to understand his talk about the non-existence of the self. I couldn’t. I really could not grok it at all.
Many people consider His Holiness to be a Living Buddha. Where are the goal lines on that? Beats me.
Deer do this thing in a deer way from over 100 yards, or at least one does, to me, once. It was a different thing from the Dalai Lama, but it was almost as total of an experience, and from a much longer distance.
You don’t have to believe this. I’m not asking that. You might or might not ever experience anything like this. It did get me thinking that the first and probably hardest thing humans do with meditation is getting past the “monkey mind” chatter and story-telling and craving and hating and stuff. My understanding is that deer don’t have those impediments to deal with at all. Unfettered. Completely unfettered by ego and concepts. As far as I know…
I can’t escape the conclusion that it must be vastly easier for deer to be their spiritual nature than it is for humans, like falling off a log easier.
Human Buddhas are rare and wondrous. I think we may really be missing the big picture here.
We humans talk to each other about how we are the whole party. It’s our world to ruin and save. It’s all up to us.
We need to become enlightened and save all the other animals. This is how we think things are.
We may actually be the lame latecomers to this enlightenment party.

Seems that climate change deniers all over the internet have just discovered Valentina Zharkova and her sunspots (or lack thereof). Manna from heaven! Maybe they should read this, then go and lie down for a bit. But they won’t…

>>…even when there’s a scientific consensus that the world is warming.<<

Do you see the deception in that sophistry? No? Let me help you out.

1. That sentence doesn’t address the main issue, which is whether humans can significantly impact the future of climate change, and climates **always** change.

2. Given the real issue is whether humans can substantially impact the natural course of global climate change, the appeal to “scientific consensus” just means that there is no good science to prove the assertion. There is no appeal to scientific consensus that 2+2=4, or is there in your mind? Such an appeal is simply an appeal to authority logical fallacy, that is unless you are so gullible as to believe “appeal to authority logical fallacy” doesn’t actually apply to… the… AUTHORITY! BTW, that’s what they teach now. To intellectually defenseless chumps who pay for their own brainwashing.

And if you actually cared about CO2 and the other propaganda, you’d be highlighting the ROOT CAUSE of all the CO2 emissions, which is the Money Power Monopolists for exponentially growing our debt-based money system enable people to buy more crap on debt and keep their “engines” of production spewing CO2, along with actual toxins by the megaton, into the atmosphere. But you won’t – even after I make the connection for you.

>> Crucially, the paper makes no mention of climate.<<

Uh, do sunspots effect our climate? If so, it absolutely implies a climate effect, but one has to have more than two unpropagandized synapses to be able to think for themselves to see how it would effect climate. No doubt they duped most people.

>> It says that “solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s” without clarifying that this “solar activity” refers to a fall in the number of sunspots, not a dramatic fall in the life-sustaining light emitted by the sun.<<

But no mention that current climate theory states that the number of sunspots correlate to increased temperatures and fewer sunspots correlate to lower temperatures? And you think this is honest reporting? It is obviously deceptive.

That’s not a failure, it is a lie that implies believing a lack of sunspots has no impact on Earth’s climate, WHICH IS NOT WHAT THE EVIDENCE REVEALS.

>>But that mini ice age began before the Maunder minimum and may have had multiple causes, including volcanism.<<

That’s not relevant. What is relevant is whether the sun spots occurred before both the Maunder minimum and the mini ice age – any middle schooler ought to pick up on that. So why did this profession propagandist, errrr, Money Power Monopolist financed “reporter” not address the relevant issue?

>>Crucially, the press release doesn’t say what the implications of a future Maunder minimum are for climate.<<

Crucially, the temperature data indicates that a lack of sunspots correlates to COOLER TEMPERATURES. Note how the propagandist, err, “reporter,” avoids addressing the relevant issue.

>>A dramatic fall in the number of sunspots won’t lead to a dramatic fall in the light produced by the sun.<<

Define “dramatic,” or else the statement is meaningless.

As far as temperatures, NOBODY CARES ABOUT LIGHT, WE CARE ABOUT TEMPERATURE ON EARTH, SO WHY IS THE SO-CALLED REPORTER UNABLE TO DISCUSS RELEVANT INFORMATION?

>>As discussed previously, the impact of a new Maunder minimum on climate has been studied many times. There’s 40% more CO2 in the air now than during the 17th century, and global temperature records are being smashed<<

It is up for debate how much temperatures are actually changing given the “hide the decline” corruption associated with the “climate scientists” who **really** need a paycheck like everyone else.

>>A new Maunder minimum would slow climate change, but it is not enough to stop it.<<

Nice declaration with no evidence to support it contained in the text of the article. There is a link, which I will review next, and I can only hope it isn’t as RETARDED and OFF TOPIC as this link – and that’s NOT ad hominem because I’m explaining exactly why it is retarded and off topic..

>>In the press release, we didn’t say anything about climate change. My guess is when they heard about Maunder minimum, they used Wikipedia or something to find out more about it.<<

Actually, that sounds like she agrees with their conclusions. “I didn’t mention the fire engine was red in my speech, they must have turned their head and seen it.” Was the implication supposed to be the fire truck wasn’t red? What? Read for comprehension, people. If anything, her statement was completely neutral.

>>However, she said that once the connection was made, it did make sense to her.<<

>>So it seems Zharkova’s justification is based on media extrapolation of her own press release and Wikipedia, not the extensive peer-reviewed literature on the Maunder minimum itself.<<

Where is the link to the “extensive peer-reviewed literature the so-called reporter is using to make this statement? Did I miss it, or was it not there at all – and we just have to TRUST THE SO-CALLED REPORTER?

I’d like to see it. As I said, I will review the linked new article on the subject next, but that wasn’t a peer reviewed article, let alone a few of them that could be considered “literature.”

>>I emailed Zharkova and she sent me two studies that support her views, but they aren’t representative of the literature and I don’t believe she has critically evaluated their content.<<

Where are the links to the two studies she sent you? Were they peer-reviewed and, if so, why didn’t you say so when you did for apparent contrary studies that are hopefully outside your imagination or dishonesty? Where are the links to the contrary literature you claim are better? On what basis did the so-called reporter conclude that that she didn’t critically evaluate the content?

Folks with intellectual self-defense don’t simply trust declarations. They want the evidence. This so-called reporter is CONCEALING THE EVIDENCE.

>>Is there any quantitative basis for claims of a mini ice age? Zharkova and her colleagues have cited a 1997 article by Judith Lean, who showed the sun’s brightness (quantified by solar irradiance) was 3 W per m2 less during the Maunder minimum than today. More recent studies, including those by Lean, find the solar irradiance varies less than was thought in 1997.<<

I don’t think mini ice age is the real issue, at least I hope not. The real issue is whether temperatures are going to drop significantly going forward and over the next 300-400 years or so. Also, “varies less than thought” is a meaningless statement – it is funny how effective this so-called reporter is at producing meaningless, potentially deceptive language. If you can’t figure out why that statement is meaningless to this context, ask me and I will explain it for you.

The Lean article is behind a paywall, and her article is apparently about the politicized human vs. sun component of global climate change. I’d still like to read it, but I’m not paying to do so.

>>In plain English, the small change in sunlight reaching the Earth during a new Maunder minimum wouldn’t be enough to reverse climate change. For the technically minded, even a 3 W per m2 change in irradiance corresponds to a radiative forcing of just 0.5 W per m2 (because the Earth is a sphere and not a flat circle), which is less than the radiative forcing produced by anthropogenic greenhouse gases.<<

As declared from “on-high!” My only comment is – “PROVE IT WITH EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE!”

I’m NOT holding my breath! 😉 But I would hold it for 2 minutes if you could provide proof. I always like to see proof of that which is real, whatever that may be. The problem arises when unreality is sold as reality, then no proof can be forthcoming, can it?

>>To be blunt: no mini ice age for us. The real story of the impending mini ice age isn’t about climate at all. It is a cautionary tale, of how science should and shouldn’t be communicated.<<

A straw man argument. The issue for most people isn’t ice age or no ice age. It is whether we will see some colder temperatures going forward, and, if so, what impact that will have on growing crops.

The overall collusion is bogus. This author WILL NOT talk about how scientists need to better communicate the evidence, far more substantial than for anthropogenic global warming, BTW, that fluoride int he water causes brain damage – and this scientific review is out of Harvard.

But you probably don’t care about brain damaging our children by scraping toxic residue from phosphate mining smoke stacks and filtering it through the children, right? It is not in your PROGRAMMING to care about that!

Or the total fraud that is statin toxins promoted as “medication.” This reporter won’t be touching that REALITY in poor communication any time soon. Hey, how about exposing Big Pharma for duping doctors about something they KNOW is false – the fake “scientific consensus” cholesterol hypothesis admitted nonsense!

Why are cholestrerol lowering toxic statins being use when Big Pharma knows the reason for doing so is “dead?” And insulin resistance is an effect as well – they dupe the masses into thinking these diseases are like a phantom in the night – they come out of the ether. But that’s another post.

The conclusion for more accurate communication is a good one, but it is completely and totally disingenuous. It was just used as a means to distract people who lack intellectual self-defense.

>> If scientists, science organisations and media aren’t careful, they can inadvertently end up promoting dangerous misinformation.<<

Indeed this so-0called reporter could. But funny how that “dangerous misinformation” promoted by major media is ALWAYS VERY PROFITABLE for the Money Power Monopolist Mega-Corporate Fascist Global Empire, isn’t it?

The article references the climate “models.” Oh, that’s nice. WHAT IS THE HISTORICAL ACCURACY OF SAID CLIMATE “MODELS?” Oh, did I speak out of turn? Because everyone knows that incredibly CRAPPY HISTORY IS INDICATIVE OF SPOT ON FUTURE RESULTS!

Right? The premise of the article is already on shifting sand with the tide coming in. Is this news to your ratiocination on the subject?

>>But there are still some uncertainties.<<

Yeah, like the climate “models” have a crap historical track record, for one.

>>Little Ice Age began a long time (certainly more than a century) before the start of the Maunder minimum – and continued long after it ended.<<

Yes, but as I stated in the other article, THAT’S NOT THE ISSUE. The issue is how the atmospheric temps correlate to the number of sunspots.

Look at the chart – if I’m reading it right it kinda sorta looks like HAND IN GLOVE. But that’s not the establishment agenda, right? Do correct me if I’m wrong.

The article is quibbling over words – the phrase “ice age” is irrelevant… the question is whether it will get significantly colder for a significant period of time, and if this will significantly impact crop growth.

>>Unfortunately not. The overwhelming consensus among the world’s climate scientists is that the influence of solar variability on the climate is dwarfed by the impact of increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.<<

Again, the requirement for “consensus” occurs WHEN THE SCIENCE CAN’T BE SUBSTANTIALLY PROVEN.

However, I’ll play a little game with you. I will mention when “scientific consensus” was 100% incorrect – the cholesterol hypothesis that promoted trans fatty acids… AND BIG PHARMA PROFITS, along with mass disability, death, and destruction for ordinary people.

I showed you mind. Now you show me yours. Name one time “scientific consensus” of a polarized subject turned into factual science, as opposed to Money Power Monopolist psyence.

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
~Dwight D. Eisenhower, Farewell Address

Scientific consensus = “captive of a scientific-technological elite” financed by “the power of money” that “is ever present, and gravely to be regarded” – not my words, President Eisenhower’s words.

I will follow Eisenhower’s advice and be alert to the co-opting of science in order to promote Money Power Monopolist agenda psyence under the guise of scientists that, first and foremost, WANT TO GET PAID. Those that don’t want to get paid simply DON’T GET PAID, AND DON’T GET COVERED BY THE MONEY POWER MONOPOLIST FINANCED PRESS AS SCIENTISTS.

Shake it off, guys. You’re sinking. Information dissemination has become like walking into quicksand. Walking into a pre-processed narrative that deprives you of your ability to think. Not something we should wish upon anyone. But take this from me: you’re already in it, and you need to get out. It’s no longer about trying not to get in, those days are long gone. You’re already there.

I’m not surprised commenters (some) think you’re not supplying them with answers.

The fact is; almost every thread, everyday, supplies all the information necessarry for critical examination and understanding of our predicament or Matrix if one prefers.
But it is like any knowledge; one cannot just be told; it must be experienced to be understood.
IMO, physical separation is an important ingredient. I chose self-exile, certainly not for everyone.
Physically removing oneself from media, social, internet, for the majority of ones day could be a first step.
But, the discovery is up to each individual each in their own ability.
But one must understand this: Everything is being done to defeat you, everything. An enlightened citizen is the enemy of the society you live in. Diligence is paramount.
Sadly this is also why so few will venture forth…

Sheldon Wolin; good catch. He lived in Oregon until he died a few yers back.
Hedges did a number of interviews with him.
He (Wolin) coined the term inverted totalitarianism to describe the U.S. form of government.

Strong series of posts. Saved me from having to comment on AGW and sunspots. PS, it’s snowing in Victoria, Australia, in summer. But generally, yes. Even old sunspot theory, to say nothing of this nice new theory, says that sunspots increase radiation, therefore lack of sunspots diminish radiation. And as plotted for 100 years, in 1,000 years of data, sunspots have indeed stopped on schedule, reinforcing the theory. And as much as temperatures haven’t risen in 20 years, despite the CO2 people’s models, NASA now records space (upper earth) is suddenly colder, much colder than expected. So the data and model build. If AGW is correct, will it overcome Maunder cooling? Unfortunately, no one knows, since the AGW models have been hilariously wrong — there was supposed to be no snow, Manhattan was supposed to be submerged, and UK was going to have cannibals by now, according to their 40 years of warnings like cold fusion always 10 years in the future — however, the Maunder/sunspot models have been dead right. So mixing hopium with gold is like dividing by zero: there’s not going to be a rational outcome.

Day, I understand what you’re saying well, but posting is unfortunately monkey-mind space, so that’s what you get. Since it is not measurable, according to the AGW and science guys your actual, personal telepathic experience isn’t real. I say that, since they experience science through consciousness, and they have no idea what consciousness is, not even a model, their science isn’t real and they know nothing. QED. But to each his own: obviously both consciousness and science are real in their own spheres. But gives you something to think about, as we worship, evidence-free, at the altar of science and their data-falsifying, email-hiding, million-dollar grant-grabbing priests.

But we won’t need to worry about that, will we, as we experience not “science,” not “global warming”, but our own personal experience, in our minds, in our senses, in our day, as we cut wood and wash our bowl, whether warm or cold, in a life that is short enough as it is.

For me, I’ll take in the suddenly frozen squashes and make curry soup, sort 15 varieties of apples, and watch this dark and quiet time of year.

What all these allegations have in common is that there is no evidence any of them are true.

I cringe when I see statements like the above. What they usually mean is “I have not seen any evidence which leads me to believe any of them are true”. Others may differ from that opinion and there may be evidence of which you’re not aware. Some of those incidents have had much investigation, including the collection of much evidence, testing and analysis. Of course, not everything one hears from official sources is true, or even remotely true, but that doesn’t mean that everything one hears from official sources is not true. It seems there are those here who think everything done by certain actors is just dandy, but that is most unlikely to be the case.

I also see we still have a healthy dose of human caused climate change denial here, some of which includes something like the opening quote of this comment (e.g. “no good science”). Sheesh, no wonder we’re heading over the cliff.